Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37676707›Full record

ArticleMicrobial genomics2023

Evaluation of sequence hybridization for respiratory viruses using the Twist Bioscience Respiratory Virus Research panel and the OneCodex Respiratory Virus sequence analysis workflow.

Natalia Kapel, Elizabeth Kalimeris, Sheila Lumley, Arun Decano, Gillian Rodger, Marcela Lopes Alves, Kate Dingle, Sarah Oakley, Lucinda Barrett, Sophie Barnett and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Enrichment techniques for clinical metagenomics.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Natalia KapelNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Elizabeth KalimerisOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Sheila LumleyNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Arun DecanoNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Gillian RodgerNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Marcela Lopes AlvesNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Kate DingleNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Sarah OakleyOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Lucinda BarrettOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Sophie BarnettNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Derrick CrookNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
David W EyreOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Philippa C MatthewsFrancis Crick Institute, London, UK.
Teresa StreetNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Nicole StoesserNuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.
Oxford BioMedica (United Kingdom) · GBOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBNuffield Health · GBThe Francis Crick Institute · GB

Funding

Department of HealthWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 110110
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Respiratory viral infections are a major global clinical problem, and rapid, cheap, scalable and agnostic diagnostic tests that capture genome-level information on viral variation are urgently needed. Metagenomic approaches would be ideal, but remain currently limited in that much of the genetic content in respiratory samples is human, and amplifying and sequencing the viral/pathogen component in an unbiased manner is challenging. PCR-based tests, including those which detect multiple pathogens, are already widely used, but do not capture information on strain-level variation; tests with larger viral repertoires are also expensive on a per-test basis. One intermediate approach is the use of large panels of viral probes or 'baits', which target or 'capture' sequences representing complete genomes amongst several different common viral pathogens; these are then amplified, sequenced and analysed with a sequence analysis workflow. Here we evaluate one such commercial bait capture method (the Twist Bioscience Respiratory Virus Research Panel) and sequence analysis workflow (OneCodex), using control (simulated) and patient samples head-to-head with a validated multiplex PCR clinical diagnostic test (BioFire FilmArray). We highlight the limited sensitivity and specificity of the joint Twist Bioscience/OneCodex approach, which are further reduced by shortening workflow times and increasing sample throughput to reduce per-sample costs. These issues with performance may be driven by aspects of both the laboratory (e.g. capacity to enrich for viruses present in low numbers), bioinformatics methods used (e.g. a limited viral reference database) and thresholds adopted for calling a virus as present or absent. As a result, this workflow would require further optimization prior to any implementation for respiratory virus characterization in a routine diagnostic healthcare setting.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyHybridization, GeneticHumansMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionNucleic Acid HybridizationWorkflowbait capturediagnosticsinfluenzarhinovirusSARS-CoV-2sequencingtarget enrichment

Identifiers

PMID37676707
PMCPMC10569729
OpenAlexW4386507491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.